Planning reform syndrome (sin-drome) noun
a characteristic combination of opinions, emotions, or behaviour resulting in the desire to reform planning legislation, whether at a national, state or local level; commonly transmitted between states and often results in the flow-on effect to other levels of government; pervasive and lingering symptoms that may temporarily be suppressed or reduced for short periods; reform rarely results in a radical transformation such as a promised streamlined system and more likely leads to increased system complexity [Greek syndrome a running together]
A better planning system
The search for a better planning system continues... one that is more ‘transparent and efficient’ and ‘contributes to investment and jobs’. It is interesting to briefly reflect on the quest.
Even though the new Planning Act 2016 is likely to commence on 3 July 2017, in reality, the process of change will continue for some time after that as the practitioners and the community learn and understand the intricate details, discovering pitfalls and tricks of the new legislation. Undoubtedly there will be a need to fine-tune aspects of the reformed system, and we should not think that we will wake up in early July believing reform is behind us. The symptoms of the syndrome will not completely disappear.Even though the new Planning Act 2016 is likely to commence on 3 July 2017, in reality, the process of change will continue for some time after that as the practitioners and the community learn and understand the intricate details, discovering pitfalls and tricks of the new legislation. Undoubtedly there will be a need to fine-tune aspects of the reformed system, and we should not think that we will wake up in early July believing reform is behind us. The symptoms of the syndrome will not completely disappear.
It is interesting how, in making the system more efficient, the result is more legislation. While the Planning Act 2016, at 313 pages, is half the size of the 663-page Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (excluding endnotes), subordinate instruments now contain much more than previously. The regulation, for example, is 400 pages compared to the 231 pages in the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009. Further, do not forget about the new Development Assessment Rules (82 pages) and the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (91 pages).
We once had a small footprint planning system
Look back in history for a minute. Before being afflicted with Syndrome symptoms, Queensland had a very lightweight planning regime. Going back to the early 1980s to arguably the most bureaucratically-complex part of Queensland as far as the planning and development system was concerned, Brisbane...the City of Brisbane Town Planning Act 1964 comprised just 19 pages and the town plan contained a little more than 100 pages of text. There were no state planning policies, guidelines or rules. Our entire planning system as it applied to metropolitan Brisbane fitted into less than 120 pages!
Will the disruption be worthwhile
Some stakeholders ask whether the significant investment and disruption will be worthwhile. The development assessment system, after all, is not fundamentally different to the current IDAS.
The recent flurry of reform activity deserves commendation. The Department of Infrastructure Local Government and Planning (
DILGP) continues to meaningfully engage with all stakeholders to increase readiness for day one of the new act. Departmental staff have been excellent and supportive in every possible way.
So planning reform syndrome creates a legislative web—the Planning Act 2016, Planning and Environmental Court Act 2016, the Planning Regulation 2017, State Planning Policy, Regional Plans, Minister’s Guidelines and Rules, Development Assessment Rules, State Development Assessment Provisions, planning schemes, local government infrastructure plans, temporary local planning instruments, and planning scheme policies.
Only time will tell whether there is any real benefit for the industry and the broader community.